The new law permits pedestrians to cross a roadway at any point, including outside of a crosswalk. It also allows for crossing against traffic signals and specifically states that doing so is no longer a violation of the city’s administrative code. But the new law also warns that pedestrians crossing outside of a crosswalk do not have the right of way and that they should yield to other traffic that has the right of way.

      • metaStatic
        link
        fedilink
        76 months ago

        the bricks all end up on one side of the cross walk. good idea, no way for it to actually work.

        • RBG
          link
          fedilink
          English
          276 months ago
          1. It’s a joke.

          2. Just throw them back after use.

          • metaStatic
            link
            fedilink
            26 months ago

            I love it, an elegant solution … now if only we could find an elegant end user to actually implement it.

          • metaStatic
            link
            fedilink
            16 months ago

            Japan used a flag system, the higher the traffic the less likely it is to work

        • Annoyed_🦀
          link
          fedilink
          English
          46 months ago

          Yet somehow some city think it’s a good idea to use the same exact idea but with a flag when crossing the street.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      136 months ago

      Eh, keeping car traffic smooth is way more challenging than keeping pedestrian traffic smooth. Also people tend to be more chaotic in there direction than cars. If a car stops in front of you you’re sorta stuck if a human stops in front of you you can always bash him in the head with a bar stool or go around or whatever.

      I know it was auto manufacturers lobbying for the law but can you imagine people just randomly darting across an interstate moving at 80+ mph? I can because I have seen it before and not once have I thought wow I sure am glad that’s legal.

        • Lightor
          link
          fedilink
          English
          66 months ago

          What, wait, no. I’ve lived in very rural areas, wtf was I supposed to do without a car? Bike back and forth a few hours for groceries?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            16 months ago

            There will always be edge cases. The trick is that your scenario ought to be an edge case rather than the most common case.

            Some one is free to search actual numbers but in the US something like

            • 50% of the population is urban

            • 75% of the population is suburban or urban

            For sure different transit or walking options are better for different scenarios but most people, including in the US, are in places where buses or trains can be useful

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          26 months ago

          I still can primarily because I live in Texas, it is not at all uncommon, not even on the interstate, though 40mph work zone going into school zones it happens regularly.

        • ArxCyberwolf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          36 months ago

          I can. I just don’t expect it to reach its destination without crashing.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        566 months ago

        I think you might have picked a bad community to share your sympathies for smooth car traffic, I’m afraid.

        For what it’s worth, I think it’s reasonable enough to forbid pedestrians from crossing high-speed (60+ mph) roads, but otherwise they should have full right of way over any road, and fuck the cars. They can just be patient and deal with it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          26 months ago

          Maybe, but the alternative is unrealistic and simply not the reality we Live in.(at least in the United States)

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            46 months ago

            That’s how every progressive movement starts, until activists make them reality. If it’s a good idea, it’s a good idea - and if that’s not the way that things are done, the question stops being “is this a good idea”, and starts being “how can we implement this good idea”.

    • zarp86
      link
      fedilink
      English
      196 months ago

      Council member Mercedes Narcisse, a Brooklyn Democrat who sponsored the legislation, said on Tuesday that the new law ends racial disparities in enforcement, noting that more than 90% of the jaywalking tickets issued last year went to Black and Latino people.

      Never heard of Walking While Black? This at least forces police to come up with better excuses.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        No you’re right. Jaywalking was abused to target minorities but never did the law ever do anything to prevent it from happening.

        • sunzu2
          link
          fedilink
          26 months ago

          Thats the beauty of the law. All bad faith actors are able to get a use case, the rest gets fucked

  • Count Regal Inkwell
    link
    fedilink
    English
    716 months ago

    “Jaywalking” being a crime is such a fundamentally brainrot thing

    The law here in Brazil, not that anyone follows it, but it basically follows the logic of “the smaller you are, the more of a right of way you have”. I.e. theoretically, a car should ALWAYS stop or slow itself to save a pedestrian or cyclist or even a motorcyclist

    … Again, not that anyone follows it, but it IS on the paper.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      36 months ago

      That’s the same logic in the US. Except everyone yields to animals, because you can’t tell a horse or a mule not to trample that person who walks next to them

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      66 months ago

      It would be nice if this was followed but the reality of the world is the opposite. It’s right of weight, not right of way.

    • merde alorsOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      126 months ago

      the term used here is “vulnerable”. Vulnerability gives you priority

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          36 months ago

          I drive a delivery truck though nyc one day a week. I have unadulterated rage for the single passenger suvs that sit in the middle of intersections, causing gridlock cause they think they’ll miss something by waiting their turn.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    176 months ago

    They were also fans of using it against left-wing protestors while ignoring the right doing it, particularly in the case of anti-genocide protests. I assume they will just find something new to pick people off in the crowd now.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        26 months ago

        Yes.

        In England and Wales where I am based, there is a really useful website that has information on laws that police like to use for protests: https://greenandblackcross.org/guides/laws/. Its a bit of a shame that the National Lawyers Guild doesn’t also provide public resources on laws for the US states that they operate in in a similar way.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    76 months ago

    While I certainly don’t think it should be a crime, 90% of the time I see people do it, they are near crosswalks and continue to walk towards them after dangerously playing frogger. What is the motivation? Why are you increasing the danger? Doesn’t make any sense.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      26 months ago

      Where I’m from you need to be at least 30 meters from a crosswalk. Although in practice it just becomes whether or not there is a crosswalk within eyesight.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      166 months ago

      In a lot of situations I would rather cross mid block than at a corner crosswalk. The cars can’t be relied on to stop anyway, and mid-block there are a lot less directions you have to worry about.

      Even if the intersection is signalized given the existence of right turns on red it’s still often safer to cross mid block.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        36 months ago

        I could see that in some areas. I rarely feel the need to do this myself, but there are occasions where it does make sense.

      • murph
        link
        fedilink
        English
        46 months ago

        That’s a good point most places, but in NYC, there is no turn on red. I still agree with being able to cross anywhere.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      86 months ago

      In Denmark it’s illegal to cross the road 10-20m (or something like that, forgot the exact number) from a croasswalk. Outside that zone you can cross as much as you want. We are though seeing fences pop up on higher traffic roads to discourage crossing, but mostly on ring roads in bigger cities, not in the cities themselves.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        similar in Austria, if there’s a crosswalk within 25 meters, you have to use it although even that law has an exemption “this doesn’t apply if traffic allows it without doubt and vehicle traffic isn’t impaired”

        Hint: most trams in Vienna are 35 meters long, so you can cross at the other end of a tram stop if there’s a crosswalk only on one end.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    16 months ago

    This is how Illinois has been for ages. The legal penalties for hitting a pedestrian are higher to compensate. And if you hit a construction worker you’d best hope you’re rich, because that’s a big-ass $10k fine on top of 10 years.

  • Lovable Sidekick
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    When you can’t train police not to be racist, just give up and make shit legal. What could possibly go wrong?

  • EleventhHour
    link
    fedilink
    English
    38
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    In 28 years living in New York, the vast majority of my crossing the street is done between the blocks. Some of them are very long.

    And New Yorkers cross the street like we own it because we know that anyone who hits us is gonna get their ass sued off and have to pay out ridiculous amounts of money.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      76 months ago

      this really threw me when I first visited new york. I come from a place where you don’t dare try that because you WILL get hit and the driver will likely get no consequences. seeing new yorkers just walk out into traffic without even looking was such a mindfuck

    • azl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      316 months ago

      I support this law (fuck cars), but if you step into the street thinking an oncoming car won’t destroy you like a pinata stuffed with ketchup packets, you have survived the luckiest lawsuit-free 28 years.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    406 months ago

    Good, especially since the law just targets POC.

    If car traffic became 50% worse to make walking traffic 5% better, that’s a win for humans in the city. It’ll help convince more people to use non-car methods of transportation and that helps spark people to vote for and invest in more non-car infrastructure.

    Ditching cars in populated cities isn’t a magic law or anything, it’s a slow incremental burn; legalizing pedestrians walking strictly helps that

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      36 months ago

      Everything we do to make car travel worse (except for ambulances and disabled folks) is a win

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      116 months ago

      There are plenty of places you’re not allowed to walk for your own safety and the safety of others. It’s not a crazy concept, although I do think that jaywalking should be legal

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        36 months ago

        “Right to Travel” == right to walk on and across an interstate freeway where 5000 lb death missiles are hurtling past me at 90 mi/hr.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        46 months ago

        Airports are so annoyingly difficult to walk around.

        I prefer walking straight through, personally.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      29
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Step 2. bring cars to the market before proper regulations were a thing
      Step 3. aggressively lobby and market that it’s the walkers fault for getting driven over
      Step 4. actually win over public opinion somehow

      • Tlaloc_Temporal
        link
        fedilink
        English
        16 months ago

        Racism. The Jays in jaywalking where probably immigrants with weird hats.